Council is not wrong.
They are NEVER wrong.
Everyone else is wrong.
And they will stand up for their right to be wrong until the end.
Here are some media articles:
http://www.citizen.on.ca/news/2011-09-15/Editorial/A_waste_of_taxpayers_money.html
http://www.orangeville.com/opinion/letters/article/1082089--melancthon-mayor-addresses-closed-door-report
I am having trouble reconciling the fact that our Mayor and Deputy sit on County Council.
County Council AND Melancthon Council operate under the same rules, Municipal Act, 2001, Municipal Election Act, Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, etc. etc., perhaps up to 100 different pieces of legislation and regulations.
At County Council agendas and attachments have been posted on-line and available to the public in advance of a meeting for years, in order to meet the transparency requirements in the legislation.
Melancthon Council ONLY provided agendas and attachments after a private citizen obtained a legal opinion in February 2009 and waiting 7 months for Council to comply.
They held fast to their respected solicitor advising them they were correct in NOT providing the pesky public with information in advance of a meeting due to FOI concerns.
Seriously, this is what the solicitor advised them. And they put that forward, despite two members of Melancthon Council attending County meetings where agendas and attachments were provided in advance of a meeting.
And I not sure if anyone picked this up from the media reports about the closed meeting investigation, but Melancthon Council went into a closed session last summer about wind turbines, with their solicitor to receive advice, a permited reason under the Municipal Act.
When it becomes a contravention and we didn't know until the meeting investigators report was released, is Council admitted the solicitor, staff, council AND the developer/proponent into the "closed" meeting.
So, the only people who were shut out of the meeting was the pesky public, you know, those people who's lives are impacted by these decisions and have rights under existing legislation.
My question to the Mayor and Deputy who sit at County Council - have they EVER gone into a closed meeting at County Council to receive solicitor advice WITH the proponent/person/developer about whom they are receiving the advice?
My guess would be NEVER.
I would also guess you will NEVER hear this admission from them.
The Mayor doth protest too much, methinks...
ReplyDeleteConfused. The agenda and all the letters are available 3 days before a council meeting. Why are you saying they are not? And I agree with the Citizen editor saying it's all kind of a waste of taxpayers money when we could have just asked them. Did anyone ask them?
ReplyDeleteHey, 11:05, READ THE BLOG THAT SAYS: Melancthon Council ONLY provided agendas and attachments after a private citizen obtained a legal opinion in February 2009 and waited 7 months for Council to comply. And in 2009, despite new provisions under the Municipal Act, 2001 Melancthon Council was operating under a 1995 or 1996 procedural bylaw.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm missing something. I could be confused too.
ReplyDeleteExcerpt from editorial - "Significantly, perhaps, Mr. Osyany pointed out that Amberley Gavel had not, itself, been the trainer who, in fact, was the municipal adviser to Melancthon."
Excerpt from Mayor's letter
"I attended the Head of Council training session and three of our new councillors attended the councillor training provided by Fred Dean of Amberley Gavel."
So, which is it? Was Amberley Gavel training Melancthon council or not?
Okay 11:11. So now they post agendas, have an updated procedural bylaw, are trained, so what exactly are you complaining about?
ReplyDeleteI was at the Council meeting where Council "discussed" this. There was no rationalization, just outrage that they had been questioned and found to be at fault and threats made against the ratepayers and questioning the qualifications of the meeting investigator, and just outrage and anger/hostility by Councillors. Someone from another municipality was there and was stunned at how Council was reacting. I believe this person mentioned it was like Mayberry?
ReplyDeleteCitizens have a right to be part of the decision making process 8:43am. They can not do that if decisions are made with corporations behind closed doors. It has been admitted that this occurred against proceedure. Council needs to fess up and smarten up. Turbines and mines are explosive issues that must have public input and citizens will continue to demand that right. Council won't listen to their citizens, they don't even want them at meetings; this has been apparent for three years. Citizens have been forced to ask for an investigation. Transparency is paramount and if council would take the offer of additional training then it would not cost the taxpayers the next time. Council has a lot of nerve blaming "the people" for their costly mistakes, especially when "the people" are the ones who pay in more ways than one.
ReplyDeleteI was at that meeting in the spring where someone was giving Council some "training". It was about having meetings in the public and when they could be private. a comment from one of the newly "trained" Councillors was that they didn't have to agree with what the trainor was saying.
ReplyDeleteCouncil and staff pay taxes here too, council and staff live here too, and have to deal with the same issues as the rest of the public.
ReplyDeleteOn the training issue, The Mayor and rest of council took training sessions from Association of Municipalities of Ontario, not Amberly Gavel, but one of the trainers happens to also work for Amberly Gavel (Fred Dean) The other training came from the Ministry of Municipal Affiars and Housing by the local rep.
The issue with the report is that Amberly Gavel is saying that council needs more training, and hey by the way we can do that training and it only costs ....but no one seems to have a problem with that conflict of interest
By the way the MMAH says thst the procedural by law is just fine and last I checked a vocal ratepayer of ours works there. The Ministry suggested that council remove or shorten question period, and cut delegation time to 5 minutes but council decided not to do that
I find it amazing that the people on this blog won't give Council one iota of credit but all of the sudden this novice investigator is some kind of a god.
Quote from the 11:48 am post:
ReplyDelete"....but all of the sudden this novice investigator is some kind of a god."
MOM, seriously I told you to quit creeping me on my blog and stop posting things about me. A god?? I am blushing....
well, I was talking about the closed meeting investigator but I'm sure you are godly as well.. lol
ReplyDeleteDon't confuse the issue Councillor 11:48, it has been painfully obvious for years that Melancthon Council needs more training, but the issue is that Melancthon Council 'dealt' with their solicitor AND a corporation behind close doors. Decisions were made, deals were made. THAT WAS WRONG. YOU WERE WRONG. Either admit YOU WERE WRONG or get "more training" so you understand that YOU WERE WRONG. Novice investigator or not, that is the bottom line.
ReplyDeleteWEll council should rely on advice of their solicitor but that is what is a big question in all this too. The solicitor was in the closed meeting with the developer and council so clearly the solicitor thought that under the rules for council and private meetings that was okay and the investigator said it was wrong. What else has this solicitor advised council about that is wrong? Adn council doesn't seem to be questioning that their lawyer made a huge error.
ReplyDeletewhich rule says it? I can't find it
ReplyDeleteIf you look in the investigators report it gives the laws where they can have private meetings.
ReplyDeleteApparently Council can't and won't even enforce the site plan with STrada, trucks on the road before they are allowed and every year residents have to complain about calcium being applied and then when they phone and complain they get cursed out by the Mayor for being rude. Go figure. Glad to know though he treats everyone the same, not just those who actually show up to the meetings.
ReplyDelete